1 2025:CGHC:17256 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2885 of 2025 Ritesh Sahu S/o Shri Dhani Sahu (Dhaniram Sahu) Aged About 25 Years R/o Near Dipupara Pond, Tarbahar, P.S. Tarbahar, Tehsil And District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Thana Tarbahar, Tehsil And District – Bilaspur (C.G.) …. Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Neeraj Choubey, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 15.04.2025 1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken through video conferencing. 2. This is the Second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants arrested in connection with Crime No. 323/2024 registered at Police Station – Tarbahar, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(2), 115(2), 3(5), and 109(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) (Wrongly mentioned as Section 296 of the BNS in bail rejection order of the trial Court). 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 20.10.2024 the wife of complainant and sister both were fasting for Karwa Chauth then on about 10:30 pm, were went out from house to see the Moon, the applicant and his brother were fighting in their own, upon which the complainant stop them from using abusing words, then applicant RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 along with his brother started assaulting wife and sister of the complainant, the father of the complainant tried to stop the fight but applicant and his brother with stick (danda) and with a brick started assaulting on the head of the father of the petitioner. Hence, this application. 4. First bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 27.01.2025 passed in MCRC No. 7884 of 2024. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the injured and the complainant of the case have been examined before the trial Court and turned hostile in the present case. It is submitted that the applicants are in jail since 21.10.2024, and the conclusion of the trial shall take quite long time. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 6. On the other hand, learned State counsel, opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant along with the co-accused is said to have assaulted the injured with Stick (Danda) and Brick, due to which he sustained fracture and he has suffered severe bleeding from his head, and as per the MLC Report, CT Scan Report, and the doctor’s opinion, the injuries are grievous in nature and dangerous to life, on which basis the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court. As such, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 3 8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that though the injured and the complainant of the case have been examined before the trial Court and turned hostile in the present case, but considering the nature of allegation levelled against the applicant that the applicant along with the co- accused is said to have assaulted the injured with Stick (Danda) and Brick, due to which he sustained fracture and he has suffered severe bleeding from his head, and as per the MLC Report, CT Scan Report, and the doctor’s opinion, the injuries are grievous in nature and dangerous to life, on which basis the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicants on regular bail. 9. Accordingly, this Second bail application of applicant – Ritesh Sahu involved in Crime No. 323/2024 registered at Police Station – Tarbahar, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(2), 115(2), 3(5), and 109(2) of the BNS (Wrongly mentioned as Section 296 of the BNS in bail rejection order of the trial Court), is rejected at this stage. 10. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 11. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar